/lit/ - Literature

>>13024627
I have proof for my claims, you have none. All we can surmise from your post is that you are trolling and don't actually care about contributing to the discussion unless you decide to roll up your sleeves and contribute something substantial.

Whatever dismissive remarks Eliot may have written about James, it barely detracts, if there actually were any dismissive remarks he made, from that high-level of praise he gave him and the fact that he was considered notable enough to compare Fitzgerald's progress in the novel to James'. Eliot did not say Gatsby was "the first step that American fiction has take since Hawthorne" or "since Melville," he said "since Henry James."

The critical opinions of Eliot and Pound at this time were pretty much taken like prophets. There are no other critics from the modernist era who reflect the tastes of the age more. Anyone who has read the ABC of Reading by Pound would know his high opinion of Henry James considering that he was the only novelist he considered worthy of study by a poet.

I don't say this as any partisan of James; it's a verifiable fact. The modernists were also profoundly influenced by Robert Browning. While many of them would say, "oh yeah, I read Homer, I read Dante," in reality they were far closer to James and Browning, their immediate predecessors. Their interest in the "medieval mind" or the "pagan mind" was just a hobby or curiosity. In practice they learned the most about style and composition from their immediate forebears, which would most definitely have been James and Browning.

WE OUT HERE DOING BAD SHIT NIGGA